Modern Morals....

siamon

So you find it offensive that someone criticises morons who suggest physical violence and spitting in a womans face? Your standards fall way way below those required from a responsible adult.

It is correct that you have no perspective, the only concern is the childs welfare, those cretins making threats from the other side of a keyboard clearly have no awareness of what their proposed actions would have on the watching children, only their own narcissistic sense.

Nobody except me has made a suggestion that is child focused, so would you mind if I reject any criticism from a load of bile spitting, women beating narcissistic cretins?

siamon

The fact that I am the only person who objects to physically assaulting a women in front of a load of children and/or spitting in her face says a great deal about the other members of this forum.

mfin

siamon wrote:

So you find it offensive that someone criticises morons who suggest physical violence and spitting in a womans face? Your standards fall way way below those required from a responsible adult.

It is correct that you have no perspective, the only concern is the childs welfare, those cretins making threats from the other side of a keyboard clearly have no awareness of what their proposed actions would have on the watching children, only their own narcissistic sense.

Nobody except me has made a suggestion that is child focused, so would you mind if I reject any criticism from a load of bile spitting, women beating narcissistic cretins?

But you're not keeping the argument child focussed at this point, at this point you're calling posters here offensive terms, and doing it as a reaction to you seeing them using terms which you think are wrong to describe this woman etc (ironic??), or even 'what they might have done at the time'. But, they're not using the terms directly at the woman, but in your case you're using your terms directly at them.

What's interesting is why you do that. You're obviously passionate about your arguments you're putting forward, and a lot of the points you make when you stick to the subject I agree are right, but, mix them all up with a delivery coloured by being quite over-argumentative and antagonistic and it becomes 'one of those threads'.

mfin

siamon wrote:

The fact that I am the only person who objects to physically assaulting a women in front of a load of children and/or spitting in her face says a great deal about the other members of this forum.

No, you're not. Not by a long shot.

finchy

siamon - try not to read everything too literally. I don't think that anybody is really suggesting that dmc should have hit her and I think that we all know that nobody on here would have actually spat on her.

Saying what somebody deserves is a way of expressing anger. People do it all the time without acting on these impulses.

Cleat Eastwood

johnfinch wrote:

siamon - try not to read everything too literally. I don't think that anybody is really suggesting that dmc should have hit her and I think that we all know that nobody on here would have actually spat on her.

Saying what somebody deserves is a way of expressing anger. People do it all the time without acting on these impulses.

Which ironically is a defining feature of aspergers.

finchy

BTW, siamon, here's Smokin Joe's actual quote about spitting in her face.

Note that he did not say that he would have spat in her face. Neither did he say that DMC should have spat in her face. He said that he would merely have been TEMPTED to spit in her face (but that he probably wouldn't have done anything at all).

Now, as I'm sure we all know, there's a big difference between resisting and giving in to temptation.

Smokin Joe wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Try explaining to your 7 year old son the reason he was not invited to a classmates birthday party (when the rest of the class, all 31, were invited) because his mum told me at the school gates, "I'm not having that window licker at Skye's party".

I'd have been very tempted to draw a mouthful of gob from as far down as I could and let her have it in the face. Though I guess in reality I would have been too shocked to do any more than stand there open mouthed.

So really, not one single poster on here (or moron as you call them) has actually advocated violence.

finchy

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

siamon - try not to read everything too literally. I don't think that anybody is really suggesting that dmc should have hit her and I think that we all know that nobody on here would have actually spat on her.

Saying what somebody deserves is a way of expressing anger. People do it all the time without acting on these impulses.

Which ironically is a defining feature of aspergers.

Touché monsieur!

dylanfernley

Siamon-- where in any of my posts do i advocate 'violence', you may not be seeing the wood for the trees.


I ask again , you advocate passing the issue with DMC's 'cretin' to another authority, thereby upping the ante, what do you think her reaction will be ?

'oh i've been told off by teach -- better do what he says-- get a grip, people don't take kindly to underhand methods. She is more likely to respond positively to a direct approach , rather than using an official 'stick' to berate/upbraid her with

dylanfernley

cleat, only just seen your missive, hope he doesn't get offended

pliptrot

siamon wrote:

Actually it is a load of emotionally immature, self righteous, judgemental dross.

Now THAT'S irony. Siamon, do you talk like this when you are adressing someone directly? Or are you a little more deferential?

finchy

Oh, and self-righteous has a hyphen. :twisted:

dylanfernley

johnfinch wrote:

Oh, and self-righteous has a hyphen. :twisted:

Pedant

finchy

Guilty as charged.

dylanfernley

johnfinch wrote:

Guilty as charged.

In todays modern system you can elect your preferred method of punishment

a- stoning to death

b- death by mau mau

c- night with ann widdicombe

finchy

dylanfernley wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Guilty as charged.

In today's modern system you can elect your preferred method of punishment

a- stoning to death

b- death by mau mau

c- a night with Ann Widdicombe

Like I say, guilty as charged. :P

I'll choose option c. At least I can close my eyes and imagine I'm humping a walrus.

Cleat Eastwood

johnfinch wrote:

dylanfernley wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Guilty as charged.

In today's modern system you can elect your preferred method of punishment

a- stoning to death

b- death by mau mau

c- a night with Ann Widdicombe

Like I say, guilty as charged. :P

I'll choose option c. At least I can close my eyes and imagine I'm humping a walrus.

It's also incorrect in that you would need several nights to fully enjoy her charms - I know, I've tried - oh and a compass incase you get lost on the south face.

finchy

Ann Widdecombe's autobiography - chapter 14: Following a passionate weekend with Cleat, I decided to become a barking mad Christian fundamentalist and anti-sex prude.

dylanfernley

's also incorrect in that you would need several nights to fully enjoy her charms - I know, I've tried - oh and a compass incase you get lost on the south face.

A large woman was visiting a gynaecologist when he asked her to fart, she said" is that a normal part of the procedure"?--- "no, i just need to re-orientate myself "


Cleat -- is there a guide book available for the south face, and the 'dark 'side ?

dmclite-3.0

thanks again for the views and observations on this. I don't know where siamon has got his slant on things from, I can only imagine he wasn't reading some of the comments fully or was just trolling for the hell of it. I know people with ASD'd cane be utter pains, my 2 sons cane be very difficult, for themselves and others.

I think trying to maintain a level of Altruism in everyday life can't be a bad thing, I try to remember this in every challenge I have with my boys condition/school/social life.

Cheers.

pinno

dylanfernley wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Guilty as charged.

In todays modern system you can elect your preferred method of punishment

a- stoning to death

b- death by mau mau

c- night with ann widdicombe

Very sorry Mr Fernley but A has been in existence for millennia, the Mau Mau uprising in the late 50's, so C is the only modern system of death. I have contemporary human rights which means that it is unfair and discriminatory for you to offer me any other way to die other than C. In fact C is just plain immoral, so thats ruled that one out too.
As I am a self-obsessed, narcicistic moron (with rights), could you please offer me the execution on a Thursday as I usually have my weekly shower on a Wednesday and would hate my body to be observed by the coroner clad with shyty pants with pi$$ stains?

Cleat Eastwood

pinarello001 wrote:

dylanfernley wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Guilty as charged.

In todays modern system you can elect your preferred method of punishment

a- stoning to death

b- death by mau mau

c- night with ann widdicombe

I ....would hate my body to be observed by the coroner clad with shyty pants with pi$$ stains?

You have more in common with anne widdicombe than you realise.

pinno

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

dylanfernley wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Guilty as charged.

In todays modern system you can elect your preferred method of punishment

a- stoned like Bob Dylan

b- death by munter doing 69

c- 30 seconds with ann widdicombe

We have more in common with anne widdicombe than you realise.

Whilst in the Cotswolds, I went to a very posh party which was a bit posh as all the people at the party were poshies as it was a very posh party. I was on latrine/long drop duty. After 23 pints of Le cidre stolen from the back of the manor, I managed to chat up AW and being a bit posh, I thought it would be apt to bang her up against the local Spar shop. (We both deployed brown paper bags, just in case hers fell off)
We were the only attraction for miles around. In the end, she said to me, 'Darling, i'm arriving'.

After that, she mentioned a technique involving a mobile phone on vibrate, some bin liners and a courgette that she had passed on to some strange scally wearing plus fours with a penny farthing who had a rather odd repetitive twitch. In his back pocket was a pack of dodgy playing cards adourned with only the very porkiest of porky females from accross the pond for purposes of strip poker. Now, the story comes full circle but at least no poor ba$tard was born to our dear Annie because her insides were a rocky place where our seeds could find no purchase. The poor resultant sprogget(s) would have... cont p94

Is the immediate perception of modern+morals naturally assume depravity ? 'cos if it doesn't - oops.

pipipi

Knowing Medway I'm surprised she wasn't even ruder

Now for my moral dilema. Would I now invite Skye to my party? Hopefully educate him because it would be wasted on his mum?

Cleat Eastwood

The thing is this

pipipi

That's fantastic

MattC59

pipipi wrote:

That's fantastic

Only one of them.

pipipi

What are you being so picky four?

dmclite-3.0

pipipi wrote:

What are you being so picky four?

Get yer coat...........

peat

Certain amount of TLDR, i got halfway through the second page.

My 2-penneth on that would be (and im sure its been covered) is that someone calling your autistic son a 'Window Licker' to your face, and someone calling a stranger on a forum a 'Window Licker' are two rather different things. The former is just a flat-out cnut, the latter is.............well....its nothing.